Speaking from recent experience, lots of little XML files is ok if you're accessing them one at a time, but if you need to pull up more than one at a time, it can get slow quick. I had a project where I had to load 5-10 small xmls (really small, just basic image galleries, 10 items max each), and it seemed like the initial process of loading the XML files (load one, increment xml ID, load the next, etc) was the lions share of the load time, so that when it was 10 xmls at once it started to take annoyingly long (especially since that was then followed by the actual images needing to be loaded). In the end we compiled all the xmls into one big XML and loaded that up front. But on other projects, when I was just loading single small xml files one at a time, it wasnt a problem.
I would be curious though, my impression from that experience was that alot of the load time on an XML file comes from that initial loading of the file, not so much the stepping through the XML, is that accurate? And is there any difference in load time between this:  vs this: <image path="imageurl" name="imagename.jpg" width="800" height="600" /> .m On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Lehr, Theodore M (N-SGIS) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a project that involves xml... I am wondering how I should > organize my xml... would it be best (from a flash perspective) for it to > be on huge xml file with lots and lots of children - or would I be > better off breaking it into multiple xml files where one xml tag > references another xml file and so on... > > _______________________________________________ > Flashcoders mailing list > [email protected] > http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders > _______________________________________________ Flashcoders mailing list [email protected] http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
